Trump administration extends deadline for NYC to end congestion pricing
Alex Kent/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — The Trump administration has extended the deadline it gave New York City to end its congestion pricing program, the first of its kind in the nation, as New York officials vowed to keep the tolls on.
The Federal Highway Administration initially instructed the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to stop collecting tolls by this Friday to allow for an “orderly cessation.”
A day before that deadline, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced on social media that the Department of Transportation is granting New York a “30-day extension as discussions continue.”
“Know that the billions of dollars the federal government sends to New York are not a blank check. Continued noncompliance will not be taken lightly,” he said Thursday.
Duffy also warned New York Gov. Kathy Hochul that President Donald Trump and the federal government are “putting New York on notice.”
“Your refusal to end cordon pricing and your open disrespect towards the federal government is unacceptable,” he said.
In response, Hochul highlighted her statement on social media after the U.S. Department of Transportation pulled federal approval of the congestion pricing plan last month, in which she said, “The cameras are staying on.”
The approval was pulled on Feb. 19 following a review requested by Trump. Duffy said at the time that the “scope of this pilot project as approved exceeds the authority authorized by Congress” under the Federal Highway Administration’s Value Pricing Pilot Program while calling it “backwards and unfair.”
The MTA has said it is challenging the Trump administration’s reversal in federal court, seeking a declaratory judgment that the DOT’s move is not proper. Hochul and MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber have said they will not turn off the tolls without a court order.
Lieber reiterated that stance during remarks at an unrelated press briefing on Tuesday while contending that this is “not a test of wills” but normal litigation procedure.
“We’re just proceeding with the dispute as you would normally in any litigation setting,” he said. “This is not a test of wills. It’s just the reality of when you have a dispute, things don’t change until a court orders it, and that has not yet taken place.”
“We don’t expect it will, because we’re on pretty strong legal footing,” he added.
Lieber said the federal government has not yet responded to the MTA’s initial complaint, and that there is still more time for them to do so.
“The good news is that the program, which has had such amazing benefits for New Yorkers — faster travel, cleaner air, fewer crashes, less honking, quieter, better environment for all, and also great economic benefits — all that is going to continue,” Lieber said.
“The program is underway now for 10 weeks, and it’s been successful by every standard,” he continued. “And it’s the right thing to do for New York to continue it.”
The congestion pricing plan, which launched on Jan. 5, charges passenger vehicles $9 to access Manhattan below 60th Street during peak hours as part of an effort to ease congestion and raise funds for the city’s public transit system. During peak hours, small trucks and charter buses are charged $14.40 and large trucks and tour buses pay $21.60.
The toll generated nearly $50 million in revenue in its first month and is on track to generate $500 million in net revenue by the end of this year, as initially projected, the MTA said.
Photo by MARK SCHIEFELBEIN/POOL/AFP via Getty Images
Secretary of State Marco Rubio told embassy officials in Guatemala this week that it was “not our intention” to uproot families deployed overseas with USAID, despite the agency issuing a 30-day mandate for their return.
“I know it’s hard to ask for patience. I know it’s hard to ask for trust,” Rubio said, according to a partial transcript of his meet-and-greet with embassy staff that was obtained by ABC News.
Rubio, who was tapped to serve as the acting director of the aid agency, also seemed to acknowledge the administration’s haphazard approach to cutting USAID — which handles foreign aid, disaster relief and international development programs — saying it was undertaken “in a manner that we would have preferred to be different, but we’re forced to do because of impediments that we would confront.”
Elon Musk, the head of the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, said earlier this week he was “in the process” of “shutting down” the agency with the backing of President Donald Trump, as part of efforts to trim the size of the federal government and eliminate waste.
The Trump administration on Wednesday placed all direct-hire employees at USAID on administrative leave starting Friday, with plans to recall all foreign-based USAID employees back to the U.S. within 30 days.
In the transcript of Rubio’s meeting with Guatemalan embassy staff, he says that the ambassador to Guatemala “handed” him a list of USAID programs in the country that he said “align with our U.S. goals and our interests.” That list was the result of an all-night scramble by staff who were directed to compile it shortly after the secretary arrived in the country, according to an embassy official.
Rubio said that document “gave us the idea that we should ask the same exercise be conducted by every Mission around the world so that intelligent decisions can be made” regarding which programs to keep, before the end of Thursday.
The directive has quickly resulted in pushback from some USAID staff stationed abroad, who say the Thursday deadline set by State Department leadership will be extremely difficult for most posts to meet, and that it may be part of a strategy to avoid lawsuits from agency employees that could slow down its dismantling.
“Absolutely impossible,” one USAID employee told ABC News. “Clearly, the 90-day foreign aid review has been compressed to two days.”
Rubio’s remarks came in response to concerns from Haven Cruz-Hubbard, the USAID mission director for Guatemala, who asked about the administration’s efforts to curb foreign aid. Rubio insisted that “the United States is not walking away from foreign aid. It’s not.”
“I want to tell you that this is not about politics, but foreign aid is the least popular thing Government spends money on,” Rubio said, according to the transcript. “And I spent a lot of time in my career defending it and explaining it, but it’s harder and harder to do across the board — it really is.”
Rubio’s private comments generally reflect what he’s said publicly about the cuts to foreign aid — but his sentiments seemed more sympathetic toward the workers whose careers and livelihoods hang in the balance.
“For those of us in charge of doing the work of foreign policy, we understand [foreign aid] is essential,” he said.
The New York Times was first to report on the partial transcript.
(WASHINGTON) — Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are urging outgoing Attorney General Merrick Garland to “take all necessary steps” to release special counsel Jack Smith’s report on Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents — and they’re encouraging him to drop the remaining charges against the president-elect’s former co-defendants in order to do so.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who earlier this week allowed the Justice Department to release the first volume of Smith’s report, which covers his election interference case against Trump, has temporarily blocked the release of the second volume covering the classified documents case due to the DOJ’s ongoing prosecution of longtime Trump aide Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago staffer Carlos De Oliveira, Trump’s former co-defendants in the case.
“As Attorney General, it is incumbent upon you to take all necessary steps to ensure the report is released before the end of your tenure, including, if necessary, by simply dismissing the remaining criminal charges against Mr. Trump’s co-conspirators, Waltine Nauta and Carlos De Oliveira,” the 18 Democratic committee members wrote in a letter obtained by ABC News.
Cannon, who last year threw out Trump’s classified documents case, plans to hold a hearing Friday on whether to make the Volume Two of Smith’s report available to leaders of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.
Because the Justice Department has said it will not publicly release the second volume of the report while charges are pending against Nauta and De Oliviera, the Democrats, led by ranking member Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Rep. Dan Goldman of New York, called on Garland to dismiss the charges ahead of Trump’s inauguration next Monday.
“To the extent that such a decision to dismiss these cases might encourage these defendants to keep enabling the corruption of their superiors, those concerns are outweighed by the many indications that Mr. Trump will simply end the prosecutions against his coconspirators upon taking office anyway and then instruct his DOJ to permanently bury this report,” they wrote.
“While we understand your honorable and steadfast adherence to Mr. Nauta’s and Mr. De Oliveira’s due process rights as criminal defendants, the practical effect of this position is that Volume 2 will almost certainly remain concealed for at least four more years if you do not release it before President-elect Trump’s inauguration on January 20,” the Democrats wrote.
Trump pleaded not guilty in 2023 to 40 criminal counts related to his retention of classified materials after leaving the White House, and later that year pleaded not guilty to separate charges of undertaking a “criminal scheme” to overturn the results of the 2020 election.
Both cases were dropped following Trump’s reelection in November due to a longstanding Justice Department policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president.
In their letter to Garland, Democrats argued that the release of the full classified documents report was in “the public interest.”
“To the extent the tangential charges against Mr. Nauta and Mr. De Oliveira stand in the way of the overriding imperative of transparency and truth, the interests of justice demand that their cases be dismissed now so that the entirety of Special Counsel Smith’s report can be released to the American people,” they wrote.
(NEW ORLEANS) — The anticipation surrounding Super Bowl LIX in New Orleans is not just about which team will win, it’s whether or not the city can pull the game off without a serious security breach.
New Orleans has hosted 10 Super Bowls in previous years, but Sunday’s game at the Superdome is different. Just over a month before Sunday’s kick-off, the city was the target of a terrorist attack on New Year’s Day in which a driver racing down Bourbon Street killed 14 people, injured 57 others, and heightened fears among locals that the city is unprepared for the estimated 100,000 visitors expected to arrive this week.
“New Orleans never had a reputation as a high target type place” for terrorism, “it was always ‘the Big Easy,'” said Eric Cook, executive chef and owner of St. John, a restaurant in the city’s Central Business District that is just a short walk from the stadium. The attack, he said, “really made everyone realize we’re all vulnerable at any time. I have concerns about it, I really do.”
Security concerns were heightened this week after President Donald Trump announced he is planning to attend the game, a first for any sitting president.
NFL Chief Security Officer Cathy Lanier said the NFL changed its security plan since the attack and is “constantly monitoring what is going on in the environment and security worlds” in the days leading up to the game. She said more than 2,700 state, federal, and local law enforcement will be present in and around the Superdome and private drones are prohibited. She declined to talk in specific about other measures the league is taking, citing security concerns.
In the weeks following the Bourbon Street attack, the FBI gave the game a Special Event Assessment Rating (SEAR) 1 rating, “defined as a significant event with national and/or international importance that requires extensive federal interagency support,” according to a threat assessment the agency released in late January.
The FBI said the game, along with days of activities leading up to kick-off, make it “an attractive target for foreign terrorist organizations, homegrown violent extremists, domestic violent extremists, lone offenders, hate crime perpetrators, and those engaged in other reportable targeted violence due to their potential to cause mass casualty incidents and draw attention to ideological causes.”
The report warns that a copycat attack is possible since “vehicle ramming has become a recurring tactic employed by threat actors in the west.” Other factors contributing to the threat environment is unrest in the Middle East, the high number of pre-game events in the city, the use of unauthorized unmanned aircraft systems, and the potential of cyberattacks “designed to facilitate short-term financial gain or highly visible, symbolic disruptions.”
Eric DeLaune, a special agent in charge of Homeland Security Investigations in New Orleans, is tasked with coordinating federal efforts around the Super Bowl. “In the days ahead, there will be a significant increased law enforcement presence in New Orleans, some of which will be visible and obvious,” he told reporters Monday.
A congressional delegation led by Alabama Rep. Dale Strong, the chair of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Management and Technology, this week toured the site of the Bourbon Street attack and the Superdome before a briefing by the NFL and law enforcement officials.
“This tragedy could happen in any state, any city—that is why it is so important that we invest in local law enforcement and give them the capabilities they need to prevent crimes before they happen,” Strong said in a statement
Guns allowed, but not coolers
The Bourbon Street attack triggered a state of emergency from the state, which Gov. Jeff Landry followed up weeks later with an executive order that established a wide security perimeter around Bourbon Street, from Canal to St. Ann Streets and Royal to Dauphine Streets. Coolers and ice chests are prohibited and bag checks conducted by the Louisiana State Police will start Wednesday at every entry point leading to Bourbon Street.
For French Quarter residents like Glade Bilby, who has called the neighborhood home for more than 40 years and is president of French Quarter Citizens, a non-profit that focuses on quality of life issues, the added security is “welcome.” He said, however, the security focus on Bourbon Street is limiting.
Another attack “could happen anywhere,” he said. “If this happened on Barracks, Gov. Nichols, it still affects the French Quarter which is an international brand. If you’re really intent on doing evil, you’ll be able to do it no matter what.”
Bilby is among many here who have been vocal all week about the contraction established by Landry which prohibits coolers into the security perimeter while state law allows people to carry in firearms without a permit. “That’s very problematic. It ties one hand behind law enforcement’s back,” Bilby said.
When Landry took office last year, he signed into law legislation to allow for the carrying of a concealed handgun without a permit or training. He rejected pleas from lawmakers in New Orleans to make the French Quarter and other entertainment districts in the city exempt. That means, according to Metropolitan Crime Commission President Rafael Goyeneche “there’s nothing that can be done legally with respect to people bringing firearms into the French Quarter.”
If law enforcement discovers a checked bag contains a handgun, “they have no recourse but to let them walk into the French Quarter, and that poses a real threat,” Goyeneche told WWL radio last month.
Landry’s office did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment. He has not commented on rejecting the carve-out on his gun legislation for the French Quarter but said upon signing the gun bill: “It’s fundamentally clear—law-abiding citizens should never have to seek government permission to safeguard themselves and their families.”
New Orleans City Councilmember Joe Giarrusso said the city will continue to advocate to state lawmakers that an exception should be made to prohibit conceal carry in the French Quarter because the environment is so unique.
“You have so many tourists packed into a small space and we’re encouraging people to drink alcohol inside and outside. That’s the ethos of what is going on there,” he said. “Alcohol and guns don’t mix. This is not a partisan issue.”
Investigations pending
Besides the refusal to carve out the French Quarter as a gun-free zone, concerns remain that the city hasn’t learned a lesson from the security gaps that safety officials have said made it easier for Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a U.S.-born citizen from Texas, to drive a truck for at least three blocks in the early morning of New Year’s Day.
Two investigations — one by the city council and a second launched by Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill — are looking into why protective columns designed to block vehicle traffic were removed and why other anti-vehicle barriers were not deployed.
“The People of Louisiana deserve answers,” said Murrill. “We are committed to getting a full and complete picture of what was done or not done, and more importantly, what needs to change so we can prevent this from ever happening again.”
New Orleans Police Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick told the city council she hired former New York Police Commissioner William J. Bratton to serve as a consultant to investigate the security lapses.
Bratton did not immediately respond to ABC News’ request for comment on the investigation.
Still, for all the promises and pending investigations and final reports, the big game will still proceed Sunday. Cook said an outcome without a major safety incident will be critical for businesses like his own that saw traffic drop following the New Year’s Day attack.
“We hope the success of this weekend will generate more trusting folks to come down here and visually see that New Orleans is open for business and we’re safe and we’re prepared,” Cook said.
Giarrusso admitted that New Orleanians are “weary and wary” but have no choice but to move forward.
“The whole point of terrorism is to prevent people from doing what in free society people are allowed to do,” he said. “We have to find a sweet spot of finding reasonable safety protection for people and ensuring we’re leading our lives the way we’re supposed to.”
